It's my favorite weapon. Can't wait until the upcoming counter failure gets to a "fever" pitch and massing occurs. Then we will see the crispy critters get going. I also like the thermite versions, that get the metal gone. Hope to get to see more such efficient usage soon. Graham, has yet to run out of the ladt Ukranian, but he's getting close. Slava zuchinni.
The interesting thing about the TOS-1 is that it was supposed to be operated by Soviet CBRN troops. The logic was that you can’t have contaminated ground from chemical weapons or biological agents if you vaporize it with thermobaric warheads.
Flame operations has always been the purview of chemical troops in most armies. It had zero to do with decontamination. As a US Army chemical dude one of my jobs was to make napalm and fill munitions and flame throwers.
As soon as you said that Ukraine captured some of them to use against Russia... my first question was "and how much ammo?" I'd doubt there was any significant use of these by the Ukrainians.
Ukraine had a lot of Soviet munitions production, which is a big part of how they've been able to keep so many captured tanks and artillery pieces firing. That said, I suspect these are more valuable as a source of tank parts than for redeployment.
highly doubt it, it's not so easy to reproduce something like that fast. Also there is ammo shortage in entire West at the moment - they will not even start something new to produce since there is not enough ammo for current howitzers and tanks. Also UA have no air support and using TOS short range artillery without air support is suicide.
Its definitely useful against dug in targets and in urban warfare against enemy strongholds. It substitutes air power in many scenarios and is insensitive to the presence of strong anti air defenses.
I never understood, like for Azovstal, why Russians didn't use tear gas. I don't see how it can be considered "chemical weapons" when used by police against unarmed people even in democratic countries. Or burning sulphur. They are very unpleasant at concentrations which are far bellow lethal.
@@BojanPeric-kq9et In order to avoid any grey zones, ALL use of gas is prohibited in war. Reason it's allowed by police (who also may use hollow-point ammunition) is that it is relatively unlikely that the police "accidentally" would mix in mustard- or nerve gas into their riot control gear and then claim "it's only tear gas".
@@BojanPeric-kq9et Tear gas isn't that voluminous and can't expand enough in a controlled manner to clear any long corridor or large space. It doesn't hang around that long either by design and dissipates. You need very specialized pumps and other equipment to even concentrate it in a tunnel as the USA found out in the Vietnam war. A simple office door with a rag under it can essentially block its passage. it's meant to discourage a crowd of protestors or smoke out a small car or a bedroom. Nothing more.
@@BojanPeric-kq9et There where civilians of their new provinces in the Azovstal bunker system. War is brutal enough as it is and they had encircled the area. So they decided to just besiege them until they surrender. No need to kill your own for a quick victory when time is on your side. Otherwise, thermobarics might have been used tehre too (although actual bunker systems like that in Azovstal might be immune because of being designed to protect against extreme pressure waves).
You are actually wrong. The Geniva convention since the 70s have banned all use near or at Cities or any sort of Human settlements due to how indiscriminate they are.
I've seen Australian Air mounted Thermobaric weapons being demonstrated. Even from over a KM away, this thing going off is very powerful, and briefly feels like standing next to a gas radiator. I'd hate to be in the middle of an attack by one of these munitions.
"Oh, do you think so? I always told my men that the closer you are to the point of an explosion, the safer you are " Evelyn Waugh. Officers and Gentlemen
You could say beyond a certain point the chance of being KIA decreases the closer you are to the source of the explosion... ...because the chance of being completely vaporised by it and classed MIA increases
Seeing TOS impact grids filmed up close from Russian drone POV especially in the humid conditions being fought right now let's you see the shockwave front from each exploding warhead.... That really drives home how wicked strong these weapons must be. The stories of corpses being found with lungs ripped out from the overpressure seem likely :/
Hell they are waaaaay too close to enemy lines-just 6km range-with drones EVERYWHERE-who the hell would want to crew THAT The fuel part of this explosive-would be ignited by a tiny drone warhead-a grenade-not like normal HE which require significant explosive to detonate Yeah I would not want to crew THAT-imagine the fireball when all the rockets go off-on the crew- Drones everywhere 155 precision munitions available-not for me-too little range-they will find you
@@charlesoboyle4787 That is why they mounted it on a tank chassis. They literally designed their weapons to be used in a nuclear conflict with Nato because they where convinced, that one is inevitable. I expect that tank to be airtight. The operators of that system might actually survive while any soft targets outside are getting ripped to pieces. There is a reason for these things not being given to normal infantry - or PMCs...
Are it's effects horrifying. Yes. Is it hideously effective against trenches and bunkers? Yes. But is it a war crime to use such a weapon? No. (Unless used against civilians).
The use of thermobaric weaponry was designated a war crime back in the 1980ies but because they are so effective nobody actually went as far as to outright ban them. The UNO expressed deep concern about it, as they usually do instead of actually doing something about the matter. And that's that for now
Bro being destroyed inside of a bunker is terrible for anybody soldier inside it if the bomb doesn't kill you then the collapsed concrete/steel will. Via crushed alive.
The range issue is less about precision than payload dimensions: This type of warhead is very heavy and takes up a lot of space. To make it longer range would either require an enormous rocket engine, a glide phase (which would make it easy to interdict), or a powered glide phase (massive increase to complexity for minimal gain) -- all of which would massively increase the size of each munition and limit the size of vlley per launcher. These tradeoffs are really hard to balance out, and it is clear which tradeoff the Russian design went with.
Oh no, there are thermobaric rockets for 300mm systems (smerch, tornado-s) same range as othr types. For other 220mm systems (uragan and tos-2) - more range than tos-1a. So there are plenty of thermobaric mlrs options in Russian arsenal, so tos-1a is a special tool, because thermobarics are only effective if there's precision and/or decent grouping. You have to hit quite close to target for any effect apart from intimidation and smoke.
You've mangled the "Solntsepek" even more spectacularly than one could expect :) Literally, the world means "sunblaze", which is more passing than Buratino for sure.
We, the USAF, tested this airbomb on Loatian villages in the early 1970s. I had a patient (I'm a doc) who became an ordinance engineer but who had to go onto the ground to assess the effectiveness of this experiment. Everything was dead and exploded, men, women children, goats, beatles, chickens. He was sickened.
Yep. Ukraine receiving 200B and getting beat on by budget weapons and taking (to some sources) 10:1 losses. This thing going on is stupid. Ukraine can't win this war and maybe if nato stayed minding their own business and if Minsk accords were followed the world would be a better place.
@@АлакПатрова lmao, 10:1? Russian army one of the weakest army in the world, and they even cant beat small country like Ukraine in the direct warfare. You are listen to much propaganda bro
@@chill29394 they both use rockets to deliver their incendiary loads and this is their main characteristics. Obviously the scale is different, but not the core functionality.
@@chill29394 The TOS-1 does have plain incendiary rockets though, which confirms @zbyzanna's point. That the Americans for one reason or another choose to never develop a FAE-warhead to the M202 is hardly Kremlin's fault.
The first deployment of thermobaric weapons was during the siege of Sevastopol in WW2. The Germans dropped barrel bombs via Stuka dive bomber onto Soviet positions outside the city. The Soviets sent a strongly worded communication to German high command informing them that the Soviet Union would break out its stocks of poison gas if the Germans ever used those bombs again. The Germans decided that they did not want to be fighting in a toxic environment.
In Crimea in WWII, both at its conquest and during its defense, the Romanians were a notable involvement. My grandfather was in the 2nd Romanian Mountain Division. After ending its involvement in the conquest of Crimea, this division conquered Nalchik on its own, the furthest Axis advance on the Eastern Front. My grandfather told me a story resembling with yours: There was a big corn field with many Soviet soldiers hiding in it, some able bodied and ready to fight, other of them being wounded. An SS battalion used flame throwers and set ablaze all that corn field. Hours later, the Soviets transmitted through big loudspeakers that if this tactic will be ever used again, they will dump poisonous gas on the Axis positions.
Correction: Neither the BLU-43 Daisy Cutter nor the GBU-83 Mother of All Bombs are thermobaric weapons. We have however fielded limited units of the CBU-55 and CBU-72 in Vietnam , a few hundred remaining CBU-72 in Desert Storm before partially retiring the idea in the 90's, put I think a one-off warhead into Tora Bora, and have specific variants of the Hellfire II missile and 40mm grenade with thermobaric charges. We also employed this Russian TOS system imported into Iraq in the second Battle of Fallujah against ISIS.
The USMC SMAW-NE is a shoulder fired Thermobaric rocket. It has been in service for at least 20 years. Great weapon system unless you have to carry it around.
Yes, it was used pretty heavily in Fallujah to clear buildings, for some I was just watching some footage of dudes firing them off a roof. Though we also used Mark 77 fuel air bombs in Fallujah which was pretty bad in retrospect.....
@@trogdortpennypacker6160 Yeah US used incendiaries in Fallujah since the targets were the insurgents and not civilians and US did a leaflet drop beforehand which satisfied the laws of armed conflict in regards to mitigating civilian casualties. Very questionable to use thermobarics/incendiaries in a populated city (even after evacuation), but the effectiveness of these weapons are why US and Russia use them and block any attempts to ban them.
The TOS1 is "identified as a flamethrower" because that's the translation from Russian to English. Flamethrower means something different in Russian than it does in English. It's kind of like their new mining system, it's called "agriculture." That doesn't mean they're planting daisies, the Russian word identifies a method of seeding mines over a large area.
Nah, funny names are just that, nothing to do with translation. And certainly agriculture has nothing to do with laying mines, just as flamethrower in russian mass culture is not a missile. For example most artillery systems are called after flowers species - pion, giacint, magnolia, droc, etc But some are not - msta (name of a river), acacia (tree), coalicia (coalition). Same goes for some police equipment - one baton is called "an argument", underwear - "tiger", teargas - "bird-cherry", handcuffs - "tenderness"
@@husa5777 вы сами не понимаете о чем говорите. Они пишут про flamethrower. А у нас она именно так и называется тяжелая огнеметная система. Вопрос к слову огнеметная. И в русском языке к этому есть вопросы.
Is it really capturing something if there's basically nothing left? That's like shooting someone in the head and calling it a kidnapping because you're still in possession of the body
@@1stCallipostle its about the Denazification/demilitarization of the Ukraine military. Just like you said 🤣 there is nothing left, no more Ukrainian Bandera boys there left to grind down in that city. Mission complete, to the next city..
@@caesarsalad1170 Yeah, when they hit things they only scatter dust that no civilian will ever notice that remains dangerous and toxic for years and makes its way into people's food and water...
Haha it's gets a 2.5km range upgrade and you describe it "as a slightly longer range" and this is why you are a joke bro, It's a short range artillery by design and they almost doubled it's range. I'm just glad i don't support your work anymore man.
I loved how he showed the "Siege of Sevastopol" of 1854-1855 and talked about german nazy attacks. Yes, that poor city was sieged more than once or twice.
Im wondering if thermobaric warheads could be used to clear areas with anti tank mines since their pressure is so high that they should be able to trigger those mines.
Minefields are usually coverd by observer post that can call in precise artillery support on stuck tanks or mine clearing vehicles, a swift deployment of 2 of those that could clear 400x800m minefields to clear a path for an armoured batallion trying to get behind the defense line and attack from the rear might be worthwhile if they could trigger anti tank mines
Hello! I am native of Donetsk city and I want to make one point. On 8:42 it's not the explosion of TOS-1/1A/2. It is detonation of ammunition in the air - I know it, because I was in the house on the right side of the video at this moment (Yes, I live there and seeing this video again has triggered me). According to official Russian sources, it's an explosion of 155mm projectile (shell? idk how is it being written in English, sry) shot from Caesar french howtizer. Also, as far as I remeber, Russian army doesn't have shells which'll detonate in the air to cover larger area with shrapnel (for those, who'll say that Russian army is striking the cities under its control). It's not a propaganda or inciting national or political strife comment - only clarification of information from the video, please let's refrain from aggressive comments in any direction, regardless of political views. Thank you!
There’s no war crime here. Yes it’s a gruesome killing machine but how different is it from an RPG that also kills? Let’s not bring bias to this channel.
The only difference when employed by the Russians is that a RPG might take out a room with civilians, while the thermobaric rocket kills a civilian city block.
There's tons of footage of the TOS-1 strafing treelines and trenches. Leaving behind burnt corpses. I saw one man literally blown out of the treeline. If this thing makes it to your position. You are done for.
A correction: the MOAB is not a thermobaric bomb. It's in the heaviest class of conventional bombs, hence the MO ("massive ordinance") designator. Thermobarics like the BLU-82 don't carry much explosive, just aerosolized fuel that needs to mix with air to become explosive.
.........SO,THERE WAS A MENTIONING MORE THAN A 10 YEARS AGO....ABOUT RUSSIANS MADE THEIR BLU-82 THAT WAS 4 TIMES MORE STRONGER THAN MOAB SO THEY CALLED IN "FATHER OF ALL BOMBS" ........ACTUALLY IT'S PRETTY MUCH ANXIOUS ABOUT MAYBE THEY'LL ALSO START TO DEPLOY THEM
I think the best example of the stretching grey area of the definition of a military target is best defined by Iserali strikes in Gaza a few years ago(I think it was 2019?) Where they claimed to not have targeted civillian buildings and infrastructure with bomb strikes, but the militant's tunnels beneath them.
Militants really knew what they were doing, right? Put weapons to places were civilians live. In western countries there are laws against that kind of actions, but what would terrorists care about civilians or suffering caused to them because of their actions. By the way, did you know that Soviets tought the tactic to Syrians during Yom Kippur War as Syrians were being overrun by IDF. PLO adapted that tactic as well as civilian casualties are very beneficial or should we say crucial to their cause.
@@nipe2121 yes they do. god willing to those fighting the Israeli occupation. Can only hope we’d be as tenacious if we were in the Palestinians shoes fighting an decades long occupation. As American as apple pie.
@Rex yes, I mean those ones, as these are the more dangerous ones for tanks and artillery. The other ones, like canon and mrap, they need reconnaissance drones to spot them.
@@galimbertino4939 Even though Israel hasn't yet given export licence for Spike-missiles to Ukraine, the newest variants of those have 25 km range. Even the ER II -version has 10 km range.
@@atklm1 I don't think Israel wants to get into this! 1. Even though the president of Ukraine is a Jew, but in Israel they know who this Jew supports, they don't have very nice patches on their shoulders, for Israel. 2. this is Israel's vulnerability, Russia clearly sticks to neutrality in the Middle East, balancing both Iran, Turkey and Israel, it will not be good if Russia is forced to take sides. 25% of Israel's population is Russian-speaking, many of course from Ukraine, but still most of them are from Russia. All the players in the Middle East are neutral, they stay out of the Ukrainian swamp - good for everyone.
The Russian way of war is such a unique way to envision warfare. The Book is also really good on how Russia has defeated every western army ever assembled against their nation. The Russians are truly one of the best militaries in the world and it is not based on spending, or tech, or fire power, just in the way the handle their weaknesses and make em their strengths the way they see things and events differently than us in the west. What they consider winning to what they consider losing. It is truly fascinating.
The secret is in the balance. Moderately harsh life, moderately comfortable. Moderately liberal policy, moderately conservative. To the extent of material values, to the extent of spiritual. Moderately rational development and moderately sensual development. Even the climate is moderate - both heat and cold happen.
@@Lercher-ph7ok Germany, Austria-Hungary, Turkey, Bulgaria - were defeated. France, Great Britain, Japan, Serbia, the USA, Italy - emerged victorious from the war. Russia, which had done so much for the victory of the allies, was not among the victorious countries because of the revolution and Lenin's decree to withdraw from the war, when the fate of Germany was already determined.
That's funny, did you forget about that little conflict called World War 1. Then the Germans almost defeated Russia again in WW2, which would have happened if it weren't for Lend-Lease from the West. Then there was the Cold War. As far as losing to non-Western countries- Poland, Finland, Afghanistan..... Do I need to keep going here?
@@JudgeVandelay Harry Truman made this statement a few days after Hitler's Germany attacked the Soviet Union, as published in The New York Times on June 24, 1941: "If we see that Germany is winning, we ought to help Russia, and if Russia is winning, we ought to help Germany, and thereby let them kill as many of each other as possible." You can also search for "Prescott Bush and Hitler" on Google. He is George Bush's grandfather. If American elites didn't nourish Nazi Germany like a mother breastfeeding, there wouldn't have been a World War II and tens of millions of corpses. There is a popular misconception in the US that America alone defeated Hitler. Well, to tell the truth, America did emerge with the greatest gain as a result of the destruction of Europe and the USSR.
Russia has guided munitions for their mlrs systems and for the 6inch and 8inch howitzers The reason the TOS has such a short range is because it has far heavier warheads on a relatively small rocket, this allows big boom while being easily transportable and cheap. The fact that the launcher is a tank allows it to get very close to the target with relatively low danger. This is a very smart type of system and there are multiple advantages. The system is also very simple to operate and can very easily be converter to a robot, you set it the target, it automatically uses GPS to drive to the fire position, it fires and then it returns. These advantages mean other armies might want to invest in such a weapon system in the future. It can also work on a naval version, on a big drone boat designed to strike before a landing operation, limiting any risk to your own soldiers and at the same time delivering multiple times the payload of a long range system.
It really doesn't matter that it is a tank because the ammunition is heavily exposed. There is no real advantage, which is why most armies don't do this. Long-range, light mlrs is the best way to invest
I love it that Cappy has to say 'non-firing' on the tiny GOAT guns to pass the TH-cam censors. Excellent coverage of an rarely discussed weapon system.
Hey were you even alive during Vietnam? No? Then stfu and move on. What the US did in Vietnam over 50 years ago is not justification for what Russia does to Ukrainians today. What a completely stupid backward argument. Get your ass to the recruiting center Tanky. Papa Putin needs you for his meat gridner.
3:27 the voiceover is correct, referencing the ww2 Sevastopol siege, but the wiki cutout is from the Crimean war, not the ww2 Sevastopol siege. Probably the editor blamoed it together real quick just looking up "Sevastopol siege" and called it a day. In fact i notice theres alot of mistakes better or worse in ur vids. I respect editors immensely and yours do a great job on the aesthetics, but the information on the screen is just off at times.
In the Gulf war the US used wepons enrisched with Uranium. A lot of areas in south of Iraq have high radioactivity near destroyed Iraqi tanks. Should these wepons be allowed to be used i Ukrain? Or does morality work for you differently depending on which country is doing the war crimes?
a moot point since russians have DU rounds for their tanks, they definitely will be issued to the crews if there is even a slight chance of clashes with leopards.
@@juslitor we have tank rounds capable of destroying Leopards and they're not DU. DU rounds are only for T-80BV tanks with new 2А46М-4 barrels. So far there is no evidence that we used them and most likely we won't since we need ukrainian agricultural fields.
Russia actually also has termobaric bombs. Russian name for them is "volumetric detonating aviation bombs", in russian "объёмно детонирующие авиационные бомбы" or "ОДАБ"
When a military attacks a city full of civilians, the civilians are not collateral damage. They are the target. That's just as true in Aleppo as in Hiroshima.
Hiroshima was packed full of military targets. If they hadn't built them in the city, it wouldn't have been targeted. Yeah, I know, learning history is just soooo hard.
@@nobodyspecial4702 Yup, when I read about that I was actually shocked about it!! At first I thought the US did it to flex their power, but after learning there was a high value target. Honestly if you built military object of any kind in coty...city.... expect your city being targeted for that reason.
I was puzzled when I encountered the term "heavy flames thrower" systems in Russian reports of the conflict. I initially thought it was an error from the translater. But now I understand.
Someone explained in another comment that it is due to the difference between Russian and English. I dont speak Russian but this would be something that probably could only be proprely explaning by someone who do.
I think he was implying that only losers of war get prosecuted, or even seriously accused in the media, of war crimes. Dresden, Tokyo and other fire bombings, Hiroshima/Nagasaki... any time prisoners were taken and the troops were given 5 minutes to take them back to base...
Jesus again, the USA literally bombed Raqqa with artillery and air bombs while citizens were in it. It was a livig city. They surrounded it with the Kurds and just bombed it until it was gone. Why doesn't this guy mention that?
I love how you have to specify GOAT guns are "NON-FIRING" every time you mentioned them by name. It reminds me of labels on appliances that are practically screaming to people "DON'T LET YOUR CHILDREN PLAY IN THIS". Some idiot really fucked up one time and did a lawsuit and now everyone gets to see a warning label as a monument to their stupidity.
the contrast between the united states and russia is astounding. the united states focused on horrifying levels of precision while Russia went the "surely if i throw enough explosives at it, i'll hit it" approach
The cowardly Narrator must use over a half of the video admitting that the US uses similar weapons but absolves it of all responsibility stating how it uses it in more 'humanitarian' way. This cowardly double standards is what has made western hypocrites disgustedly repulsive. Why would the narrator bring up the Battle of Aleppo and leave out the battle of Mosul. Nothing was left out of Mosul but the narrator seams to assume its okay for the US to destroy cities and civilians. At least some sections of Aleppo were left
Yeah and of all its function ak defense arsenal they need to focus on extreme lethality of the defended if all kinds white possible ontrt widde the Us will tramike over with their massive Abrams tanks linke safari ants
Why doesn't the author compare destruction of Aleppo, taken by Syrian forces with Russian AF support to Mosul taken by Iraq army with U.S. support. Could be a good example of difference between how U.S. cares about civilians and collateral damage during a war VS how Russians don't. Or... Maybe someone is just telling us BS and the U.S. is levelling cities to the ground with their guided ultra-smart weapons just as well?
To add on anti fort purpose, vacuum thermob rockets ignite in a chain reaction the available oxygen inside a structures everybody not killed or blown up violent heat and expanding gasses from ignition thats continuesly happening WILL suffocate during the aftermath
Current American FAE munitions include the following: BLU-73 FAE I BLU-95 500 lb (230 kg) (FAE-II) BLU-96 2,000 lb (910 kg) (FAE-II) CBU-72 FAE I AGM-114 Hellfire missile XM1060 grenade SMAW-NE round for rocket launcher
Every weapon is horrifying if you are at receiving end. For me it was very horrifying when US used cluster bombs against civilians, but I guess that is one of benefits when a country has democracy.
@@BojanPeric-kq9et Vietnam? US hasn't used cluster munitions (other than the AT "pucks") in a long, long time. We've gotten a lot of flak for the BLU-108's, unfairly, I think. They're precision anti-tank pucks.
Saying that the oxygen sucking effect adds to the destructive power is like saying that sound of the gunshot adds to the destruction of the bullet. The only upside of using oxygen from the air is that the weapon does not need to carry its oxidizer, but that means the weapon has to make a close to stoichiometric mix with air for the explosion. This is not very ideal because only about 20% of the air is oxygen, so the rest of the air would consume energy to heat up. That means that these explosion are cooler, and less powerful compared to using high efficiency oxidizers. (this creates a non-trivial trade-off) The vacuum is created by the explosion over-expanding (nothing to do with oxygen). Anything which can create lots of hot gas and cool it quickly can create a vacuum effect. The cooling is caused by the very fast expansion of the explosion. This weapon tend to heat up very large amount of air instead of just creating hot gas like more conventional explosives. This largely enhances the vacuum effect.
This kid comparing gunshots and vacuum bombs effect. 😱😂 You cant breath in the area of vaccum you dumbo.. there is no air(oxygen) to gasp because all of them has been exploded. Idk if it can explode your lungs also.
Thanks for the generous dose of engineering mythbusting. The amount of illiteracy amongst the media and various military tech pseudo-experts is absolutely cringe. Worst part being that they proliferate such nonsensical BS, which their audiences proceed to take as gospel.
you wrong in many points but i will say this . matter does not get destroyed for all we know oxygen will remain in air wheather you cool it or get it hot
TB warheads have to be triggered in a very specific way for the big boom. I doubt just hitting the launcher with a missile would cause the same effect as all of the warheads going off.
Look up German weapon codenamed "Nebelwerfer" (smoke thrower). Giant revolver-type-rocket-launchers on artillery carriages were loaded with 8 short fat close range rockets. I've heard the first eight shots were class propane tanks and the last was white phosphorous. I imagine it was a rush job and that getting that perfect detonation was iffy.
The notion that Prigozhin is trying to cover failure up yet walked the Ukrainians back from north and east of Soledar to behind bakhmut with a bunch of convicts isn't failure lol
Even if the civilian casualty figures are correct, it's still less than civilian casualties in a couple of Japanese cities. So it is not the US to blame someone for possible civilian losses.
@@wesworld98 which is still less than the number of civs that would have died if the US stopped sticking their nose in other people's neighborhoods and sanctioning everyone in sight for not being gay enough
@@wesworld98 that is still not a good argument, like the afganistan war would be a whole lot quiker if the US bombed anything that moved but we at least try to avoid atrocities.
@@wesworld98 Is it though? I know that's the conventional wisdom we all believe because that's what we're told every time the subject comes up, but indiscriminately wiping out two entire cities tells me otherwise. Would nuking Baghdad have fewer overall civilian casualties? What about nuking Kiev?
Works great, rockets are a serious problem. Currently per target limit is about 3-4 rockets. If its got ammo its definitely a number one target on the battlefield. Will collapse your lungs in the trench if you get caught no problem.
I've always thought TB weapons were very cool. Really kind of in a technical league of their own (not per say above other types of armament, but fairly unique all in all) Also, remember when the Ukrainians used a thermobaric RPG-7 warhead to assassinate the Russian leader Givi after the Donetsk airport invasion by hitting the building he was in with it?
When you fight in open terrain, a soldier digs a foxhole to hide from shrapnel that comes from artillery, rockets, mortars, etc... Thermobaric weapons are meant to kill everything within a certain radius that can actually breathe, it will burn oxygen along with your lungs within milliseconds. Russian Tos launcher moves into positions, fires its entire salvo, and leaves in less than a min. It's hard to catch one and devastating to face it.
@@huntclanhunt9697 Weapons like that usually become controversial after intense use, that leads to bans. That's why we created rules of war, so men could actually return home
@@tomasgogashvily5350 no, they only become banned if they cause too much unnecessary suffering or if they contaminate the land. A thermobaric weapon kills much faster than traditional artillery rounds so they don't fall under that category.
That is "incorrect" if putting it mildly. Starting with the fact that Russia used "Solncepyok" practically from the start of the conflict. Saying it was engaged to specifically to capture Bahmut is pretty much a lie.
You are ridiculous, you are talking about weapons! And weapons kill because “war is kill people and destroy things” (F16 pilot cit.). What do you think you did around the world?
15:30 Aleppo - 30,000 deaths from destruction of 31,000 buildings? Was it evacuated already? Thanks for this documentary. It just shows how appalling war is. If ordinary people had any control over this, they would be banned. And countries would have nothing to invade other countries with.
@@mikes989 Like many people I didn't know about these places. Ukraine has made them more famous. But more importantly it has made ordinary people like me look at the horror of the people and the weapons used. And at the lies like 30,000 buildings destroyed and less than 1 human per building killed. That is why I asked, were the buildings empty?
Raqqa 80 % of city destroed by US bombs (wow such high accuracy) still mostly uninhabited. Aleppo totally destroyed by evil russian now opened for tourists.
The name of the latest variant of the TOS-1 "Solntsepiok" can be directly translated as Sun Burn, but the the more meaningful English translation should be something like Heat Waive.
We do, you forgot. We just classify them as incendiary, the thermobaric explosion is just an unintended side effect, so they aren't really war crime weapons. Fire has always been the best way to dig out entrenchments. It's not going to be banned ever.
A big thank you to GOAT for sponsoring today's animations and graphics. Get Your Own Mini GOAT Replica Today bit.ly/3OMHxan
We should also stop American war crimes. Both sides bad.
It's my favorite weapon. Can't wait until the upcoming counter failure gets to a "fever" pitch and massing occurs. Then we will see the crispy critters get going.
I also like the thermite versions, that get the metal gone.
Hope to get to see more such efficient usage soon.
Graham, has yet to run out of the ladt Ukranian, but he's getting close.
Slava zuchinni.
Go and stop it, big boy. 😉👍
Wow. For the longest time, I thought these could fire live rounds! Appreciate the clarification 🙄
YT regs can be dumb as hell
You are a Government agent 🤣🤣All you do is lie. V FOR RUSSIA CLOWN
Anyone else thinks the TOS looks straight out of Command and Conqour?
Yes, it has a great look to it.
What a game that was, eh?
Probably were they got it from.
It looks like rocket launchers from Dune 2 intro.
Rise of The Reds mod has it
The interesting thing about the TOS-1 is that it was supposed to be operated by Soviet CBRN troops. The logic was that you can’t have contaminated ground from chemical weapons or biological agents if you vaporize it with thermobaric warheads.
Soviet solution af. "Comrade, ahead we have heavily contaminated terrain"
"Burn it"
Flame operations has always been the purview of chemical troops in most armies. It had zero to do with decontamination. As a US Army chemical dude one of my jobs was to make napalm and fill munitions and flame throwers.
@@WillieBrownsWeiner Make napalm? You mean handle napalm.
@@MondoChow777 mixing napalm is a time honored tradition.
@mondochow4425 nope. Make it. With waste oil, mogas and M-4 thickener. Made in 55 gallon drums.
As soon as you said that Ukraine captured some of them to use against Russia... my first question was "and how much ammo?" I'd doubt there was any significant use of these by the Ukrainians.
Ukraine had a lot of Soviet munitions production, which is a big part of how they've been able to keep so many captured tanks and artillery pieces firing. That said, I suspect these are more valuable as a source of tank parts than for redeployment.
There was only one, not proven, report of use in 2022. There is no ammo for these systems made in Ukraine. Systems use post Soviet ammo.
@@raycearcher5794 This is not a Soviet system.
@@raycearcher5794lol , it literally entered service after the collapse of the USSR
highly doubt it, it's not so easy to reproduce something like that fast. Also there is ammo shortage in entire West at the moment - they will not even start something new to produce since there is not enough ammo for current howitzers and tanks. Also UA have no air support and using TOS short range artillery without air support is suicide.
Its definitely useful against dug in targets and in urban warfare against enemy strongholds. It substitutes air power in many scenarios and is insensitive to the presence of strong anti air defenses.
I never understood, like for Azovstal, why Russians didn't use tear gas. I don't see how it can be considered "chemical weapons" when used by police against unarmed people even in democratic countries. Or burning sulphur. They are very unpleasant at concentrations which are far bellow lethal.
@@BojanPeric-kq9et In order to avoid any grey zones, ALL use of gas is prohibited in war.
Reason it's allowed by police (who also may use hollow-point ammunition) is that it is relatively unlikely that the police "accidentally" would mix in mustard- or nerve gas into their riot control gear and then claim "it's only tear gas".
@@BojanPeric-kq9et Tear gas isn't that voluminous and can't expand enough in a controlled manner to clear any long corridor or large space. It doesn't hang around that long either by design and dissipates. You need very specialized pumps and other equipment to even concentrate it in a tunnel as the USA found out in the Vietnam war. A simple office door with a rag under it can essentially block its passage. it's meant to discourage a crowd of protestors or smoke out a small car or a bedroom. Nothing more.
@@BojanPeric-kq9et There where civilians of their new provinces in the Azovstal bunker system. War is brutal enough as it is and they had encircled the area. So they decided to just besiege them until they surrender. No need to kill your own for a quick victory when time is on your side. Otherwise, thermobarics might have been used tehre too (although actual bunker systems like that in Azovstal might be immune because of being designed to protect against extreme pressure waves).
@@johanmetreus1268
If it's banned in war it should be banned for police, including hollow points.
Use of flame weapons is not a war crime, however using them to suppress civilians is a war crime.
Prove it’s been used intentionally against civilians?? Not from Ukranians sources please
Do you think that the NATO or Russia care about it? Neither gives a damn about laws.
While i listen to the Serbian song my father is a war criminal by baja
You are actually wrong.
The Geniva convention since the 70s have banned all use near or at Cities or any sort of Human settlements due to how indiscriminate they are.
@@vladislavchekunov4530 Brainwashed
I've seen Australian Air mounted Thermobaric weapons being demonstrated. Even from over a KM away, this thing going off is very powerful, and briefly feels like standing next to a gas radiator. I'd hate to be in the middle of an attack by one of these munitions.
"Oh, do you think so? I always told my men that the closer you are to the point of an explosion, the safer you are "
Evelyn Waugh.
Officers and Gentlemen
@@paulbeesley8283 That is satire for you... 🙂
You could say beyond a certain point the chance of being KIA decreases the closer you are to the source of the explosion...
...because the chance of being completely vaporised by it and classed MIA increases
That's an interesting anecdote. Cheers 🍻
I'd hate to be not close enough to be killed, but close enough to be left alive and maimed lol
I can't believe they're using Term of services on Ukraine!!!
What's next? A dmca?? The ban?
Ah yes, the most feared type of soldier on the battlefield
Lawyers
Really is that why India has a small navy
@@indiasuperclean6969 we love india 🇺🇦🤝 🇮🇳
@@chilbiyitoperhaps someday.
Small portable thermobarics must do crit psych damage to enemy units. Seriously though, wouldn't want to be in the other side if that.
Seeing TOS impact grids filmed up close from Russian drone POV especially in the humid conditions being fought right now let's you see the shockwave front from each exploding warhead.... That really drives home how wicked strong these weapons must be. The stories of corpses being found with lungs ripped out from the overpressure seem likely :/
least indian shizo
I can dodge all of them missiles
Hell they are waaaaay too close to enemy lines-just 6km range-with drones EVERYWHERE-who the hell would want to crew THAT
The fuel part of this explosive-would be ignited by a tiny drone warhead-a grenade-not like normal HE which require significant explosive to detonate
Yeah I would not want to crew THAT-imagine the fireball when all the rockets go off-on the crew-
Drones everywhere 155 precision munitions available-not for me-too little range-they will find you
@@charlesoboyle4787 That is why they mounted it on a tank chassis. They literally designed their weapons to be used in a nuclear conflict with Nato because they where convinced, that one is inevitable. I expect that tank to be airtight. The operators of that system might actually survive while any soft targets outside are getting ripped to pieces.
There is a reason for these things not being given to normal infantry - or PMCs...
Got to say it looks beautiful with all the shock waves going outward. Pretty terrifying, but strangely beautiful
Are it's effects horrifying. Yes. Is it hideously effective against trenches and bunkers? Yes. But is it a war crime to use such a weapon? No. (Unless used against civilians).
Everything Russia uses is always against civilians!
Killing civilians is a war crime no matter the method.
@@indiasuperclean6969 why are Indians so weird on the internet and always think their country is the apex of humanity lol
The use of thermobaric weaponry was designated a war crime back in the 1980ies but because they are so effective nobody actually went as far as to outright ban them. The UNO expressed deep concern about it, as they usually do instead of actually doing something about the matter. And that's that for now
Bro being destroyed inside of a bunker is terrible for anybody soldier inside it if the bomb doesn't kill you then the collapsed concrete/steel will. Via crushed alive.
AMERICAN talking about destryoing CITYES and civilains it's fukin JOKE ....
The range issue is less about precision than payload dimensions: This type of warhead is very heavy and takes up a lot of space. To make it longer range would either require an enormous rocket engine, a glide phase (which would make it easy to interdict), or a powered glide phase (massive increase to complexity for minimal gain) -- all of which would massively increase the size of each munition and limit the size of vlley per launcher. These tradeoffs are really hard to balance out, and it is clear which tradeoff the Russian design went with.
Oh no, there are thermobaric rockets for 300mm systems (smerch, tornado-s) same range as othr types. For other 220mm systems (uragan and tos-2) - more range than tos-1a.
So there are plenty of thermobaric mlrs options in Russian arsenal, so tos-1a is a special tool, because thermobarics are only effective if there's precision and/or decent grouping. You have to hit quite close to target for any effect apart from intimidation and smoke.
You've mangled the "Solntsepek" even more spectacularly than one could expect :)
Literally, the world means "sunblaze", which is more passing than Buratino for sure.
It's a running joke on this channel that he mangles the names of everything
Go easy on the guy, @12:16 he can't even spell battalions properly. Betallions is not even close.
I am honestly impressed
@@clivedinosaur8407 As opposed to Sigmallion
SOLENVESKY! because if its russian its gotta end with a "sky" sound right?
that made me cringe pretty badly
We, the USAF, tested this airbomb on Loatian villages in the early 1970s. I had a patient (I'm a doc) who became an ordinance engineer but who had to go onto the ground to assess the effectiveness of this experiment. Everything was dead and exploded, men, women children, goats, beatles, chickens. He was sickened.
The west or US doing it so it's not a war crime (see the pattern here)
But Russia using them is a "war crime", huh?
That's awful, especially that it killed The Beatles.
@@EDKguy Only Ringo Starr
whut? no not really right
The TOS-1 and the Lancet are two incredible monsters.
Yep. Ukraine receiving 200B and getting beat on by budget weapons and taking (to some sources) 10:1 losses. This thing going on is stupid. Ukraine can't win this war and maybe if nato stayed minding their own business and if Minsk accords were followed the world would be a better place.
@@АлакПатрова everybody knows UA stands zero chances of winning anything here.
@@vickomen333 you'd be surprised. Americans, those on the left are easilly manipulated.
+ KA-52
@@АлакПатрова lmao, 10:1? Russian army one of the weakest army in the world, and they even cant beat small country like Ukraine in the direct warfare. You are listen to much propaganda bro
American made M202 FLASH is also categorized as flame thrower so the classification isn't that unique.
M202 FLASH is a flamethrower. It's not a thermobaric MLRS. Calling TOS1 a flamethrower is just calling a rifle a butter knife.
@@chill29394 they both use rockets to deliver their incendiary loads and this is their main characteristics. Obviously the scale is different, but not the core functionality.
@@zbyszanna absolutely not. Core functionality of TOS-1 is thermobaric effect. M202 doesn't even have that functionality.
@@chill29394 The TOS-1 does have plain incendiary rockets though, which confirms @zbyzanna's point.
That the Americans for one reason or another choose to never develop a FAE-warhead to the M202 is hardly Kremlin's fault.
It is different when the USA does it. Always. No exceptions from that exception.
Just remember, it's only a crime if you lose.
Losing is the only crime.
indeed.. US prove it.
This happens when u upgrade shovel so much it becomes mini nuke.
Looks like the CIA has influenced the influencer 😏
💯💯
No doubt
The first deployment of thermobaric weapons was during the siege of Sevastopol in WW2. The Germans dropped barrel bombs via Stuka dive bomber onto Soviet positions outside the city. The Soviets sent a strongly worded communication to German high command informing them that the Soviet Union would break out its stocks of poison gas if the Germans ever used those bombs again. The Germans decided that they did not want to be fighting in a toxic environment.
Got any links of that?
No because "trust me Bro"
In Crimea in WWII, both at its conquest and during its defense, the Romanians were a notable involvement. My grandfather was in the 2nd Romanian Mountain Division. After ending its involvement in the conquest of Crimea, this division conquered Nalchik on its own, the furthest Axis advance on the Eastern Front. My grandfather told me a story resembling with yours: There was a big corn field with many Soviet soldiers hiding in it, some able bodied and ready to fight, other of them being wounded. An SS battalion used flame throwers and set ablaze all that corn field. Hours later, the Soviets transmitted through big loudspeakers that if this tactic will be ever used again, they will dump poisonous gas on the Axis positions.
@@FlorinSutu Considering the degree of swinery the germans and russians cooked up for eachother, that sounds like an old wives tale.
ironcially if that is true the Nazis where actually more reasonable then the US is about such matters.
Correction: Neither the BLU-43 Daisy Cutter nor the GBU-83 Mother of All Bombs are thermobaric weapons. We have however fielded limited units of the CBU-55 and CBU-72 in Vietnam , a few hundred remaining CBU-72 in Desert Storm before partially retiring the idea in the 90's, put I think a one-off warhead into Tora Bora, and have specific variants of the Hellfire II missile and 40mm grenade with thermobaric charges. We also employed this Russian TOS system imported into Iraq in the second Battle of Fallujah against ISIS.
The USMC SMAW-NE is a shoulder fired Thermobaric rocket. It has been in service for at least 20 years. Great weapon system unless you have to carry it around.
Oh yeah the SMAW is so great only the Marines get stuck with it!
We also used the M202 Flash into the 1990s. That thing literally fired napalm rockets.
@@j.robertsergertson4513 Why didn't the Army want it?
Yes, it was used pretty heavily in Fallujah to clear buildings, for some I was just watching some footage of dudes firing them off a roof. Though we also used Mark 77 fuel air bombs in Fallujah which was pretty bad in retrospect.....
@@trogdortpennypacker6160 Yeah US used incendiaries in Fallujah since the targets were the insurgents and not civilians and US did a leaflet drop beforehand which satisfied the laws of armed conflict in regards to mitigating civilian casualties. Very questionable to use thermobarics/incendiaries in a populated city (even after evacuation), but the effectiveness of these weapons are why US and Russia use them and block any attempts to ban them.
Hypocrisy
The TOS1 is "identified as a flamethrower" because that's the translation from Russian to English. Flamethrower means something different in Russian than it does in English. It's kind of like their new mining system, it's called "agriculture." That doesn't mean they're planting daisies, the Russian word identifies a method of seeding mines over a large area.
Nah, funny names are just that, nothing to do with translation. And certainly agriculture has nothing to do with laying mines, just as flamethrower in russian mass culture is not a missile.
For example most artillery systems are called after flowers species - pion, giacint, magnolia, droc, etc But some are not - msta (name of a river), acacia (tree), coalicia (coalition).
Same goes for some police equipment - one baton is called "an argument", underwear - "tiger", teargas - "bird-cherry", handcuffs - "tenderness"
как русский скажу, что если переводить дословно на английский, то будет означать как примерно (very sunny summer day)
Я бы перевел так: heatness of sun in 12:00 on the beach😅
burning sunshine это наверное лучше)
@@husa5777 вы сами не понимаете о чем говорите. Они пишут про flamethrower. А у нас она именно так и называется тяжелая огнеметная система. Вопрос к слову огнеметная. И в русском языке к этому есть вопросы.
Center part of Bakhmut? Nah they captured ALL of Bakhmut
They are still coping with it.
Over 100 thousand dead orcs to take a ruin.
Ukraine just started probing attacks with countoffensive and already taken 1.4 kilometers in 1 day
Its called Artemovsk now 😅
Is it really capturing something if there's basically nothing left?
That's like shooting someone in the head and calling it a kidnapping because you're still in possession of the body
@@1stCallipostle its about the Denazification/demilitarization of the Ukraine military. Just like you said 🤣 there is nothing left, no more Ukrainian Bandera boys there left to grind down in that city. Mission complete, to the next city..
You mean like depleted uranium tank rounds used extensively in Iraq?
@@caesarsalad1170 Yeah, when they hit things they only scatter dust that no civilian will ever notice that remains dangerous and toxic for years and makes its way into people's food and water...
@@caesarsalad1170 what are you talking about 😆. Go and read up on what depleted uranium rounds do
Tos-1a Solntsepyok. Buratino is the older model. It was called Buratino/Pinocchio, because of the tip of the rockets, the detonators.
His cope is funny
Haha it's gets a 2.5km range upgrade and you describe it "as a slightly longer range" and this is why you are a joke bro, It's a short range artillery by design and they almost doubled it's range. I'm just glad i don't support your work anymore man.
I loved how he showed the "Siege of Sevastopol" of 1854-1855 and talked about german nazy attacks. Yes, that poor city was sieged more than once or twice.
Also the crimean war
@@Galaktionov hope not
@@Galaktionov what you mean
The Crimean Tatars during the war with Russia destroyed and drove into slavery about a third of the population of Russia.
Im wondering if thermobaric warheads could be used to clear areas with anti tank mines since their pressure is so high that they should be able to trigger those mines.
That would be serious overkill.
The current option the MICLIC just throws ropes of c4
Yes there was a idea to create a thermobaric mine sweeper on m113 cassie by the United States
This would not trigger magnetic mines
Minefields are usually coverd by observer post that can call in precise artillery support on stuck tanks or mine clearing vehicles, a swift deployment of 2 of those that could clear 400x800m minefields to clear a path for an armoured batallion trying to get behind the defense line and attack from the rear might be worthwhile if they could trigger anti tank mines
So basically this is a Max level katyusha.
One they do maintenance on apparently. That's a radical new idea.
Can’t wait for them to be added to warthunder
History repeats itself Nazy get destroyed again by Russians
No, descendents of Katyusha are BM-21 Grad and BM-27 Uragan
Hello!
I am native of Donetsk city and I want to make one point. On 8:42 it's not the explosion of TOS-1/1A/2. It is detonation of ammunition in the air - I know it, because I was in the house on the right side of the video at this moment (Yes, I live there and seeing this video again has triggered me). According to official Russian sources, it's an explosion of 155mm projectile (shell? idk how is it being written in English, sry) shot from Caesar french howtizer. Also, as far as I remeber, Russian army doesn't have shells which'll detonate in the air to cover larger area with shrapnel (for those, who'll say that Russian army is striking the cities under its control).
It's not a propaganda or inciting national or political strife comment - only clarification of information from the video, please let's refrain from aggressive comments in any direction, regardless of political views. Thank you!
There’s no war crime here. Yes it’s a gruesome killing machine but how different is it from an RPG that also kills?
Let’s not bring bias to this channel.
He was clear on the distinction
An RPG round doesn't stick to your skin and melt your lungs when you inhale it. Don't talk about things you have no idea about
@@rumatadestora Yeah, other explosives just shred random parts of your body with tiny bits of hot metal...
"Let’s not bring bias to this channel." its always been biased.
The only difference when employed by the Russians is that a RPG might take out a room with civilians, while the thermobaric rocket kills a civilian city block.
There's tons of footage of the TOS-1 strafing treelines and trenches. Leaving behind burnt corpses. I saw one man literally blown out of the treeline. If this thing makes it to your position. You are done for.
Yep, no amount of digging in will save you from this.
@@bubbajones6907 digging your own grave indeed.
I also saw it last year in the spring, where a man flew into space. It was horrible...
@@spartanrating8210that is powerful weapon, but that not scary like when some quiet drone drop RPG-7 grenade on shoulder in night 😮
@@userAS456 Oh yeah I think I saw that one too.
SPLAATT
horrible
A correction: the MOAB is not a thermobaric bomb. It's in the heaviest class of conventional bombs, hence the MO ("massive ordinance") designator. Thermobarics like the BLU-82 don't carry much explosive, just aerosolized fuel that needs to mix with air to become explosive.
.........SO,THERE WAS A MENTIONING MORE THAN A 10 YEARS AGO....ABOUT RUSSIANS MADE THEIR BLU-82 THAT WAS 4 TIMES MORE STRONGER THAN MOAB SO THEY CALLED IN "FATHER OF ALL BOMBS"
........ACTUALLY IT'S PRETTY MUCH ANXIOUS ABOUT MAYBE THEY'LL ALSO START TO DEPLOY THEM
I think the best example of the stretching grey area of the definition of a military target is best defined by Iserali strikes in Gaza a few years ago(I think it was 2019?) Where they claimed to not have targeted civillian buildings and infrastructure with bomb strikes, but the militant's tunnels beneath them.
That's an Israel moment if ever I've heard
Or Jamie O'Shea in Yugoslavia calling civilians "collateral damage"
Militants really knew what they were doing, right? Put weapons to places were civilians live. In western countries there are laws against that kind of actions, but what would terrorists care about civilians or suffering caused to them because of their actions.
By the way, did you know that Soviets tought the tactic to Syrians during Yom Kippur War as Syrians were being overrun by IDF. PLO adapted that tactic as well as civilian casualties are very beneficial or should we say crucial to their cause.
@@nipe2121 yes they do. god willing to those fighting the Israeli occupation. Can only hope we’d be as tenacious if we were in the Palestinians shoes fighting an decades long occupation. As American as apple pie.
@@nipe2121 Ahh now it makes sense that when the West goes to war they fist thing we target is the Civ. Infrastructure...
They have increased their range from 4km to 10 km recently, which made the difference as they can not be targeted by rockets anymore.
Cannot be targeted by rockets? Even the old Soviet Grad-system rockets have over 50 km range. Or do you mean only shoulder-fired rockets?
@Rex yes, I mean those ones, as these are the more dangerous ones for tanks and artillery. The other ones, like canon and mrap, they need reconnaissance drones to spot them.
@@galimbertino4939 Even though Israel hasn't yet given export licence for Spike-missiles to Ukraine, the newest variants of those have 25 km range. Even the ER II -version has 10 km range.
@@atklm1 they will never give the export license as russia is in syria.
@@atklm1 I don't think Israel wants to get into this!
1. Even though the president of Ukraine is a Jew, but in Israel they know who this Jew supports, they don't have very nice patches on their shoulders, for Israel.
2. this is Israel's vulnerability, Russia clearly sticks to neutrality in the Middle East, balancing both Iran, Turkey and Israel, it will not be good if Russia is forced to take sides. 25% of Israel's population is Russian-speaking, many of course from Ukraine, but still most of them are from Russia. All the players in the Middle East are neutral, they stay out of the Ukrainian swamp - good for everyone.
The Russian way of war is such a unique way to envision warfare. The Book is also really good on how Russia has defeated every western army ever assembled against their nation. The Russians are truly one of the best militaries in the world and it is not based on spending, or tech, or fire power, just in the way the handle their weaknesses and make em their strengths the way they see things and events differently than us in the west. What they consider winning to what they consider losing. It is truly fascinating.
The secret is in the balance. Moderately harsh life, moderately comfortable. Moderately liberal policy, moderately conservative. To the extent of material values, to the extent of spiritual. Moderately rational development and moderately sensual development. Even the climate is moderate - both heat and cold happen.
@@Lercher-ph7ok Germany, Austria-Hungary, Turkey, Bulgaria - were defeated. France, Great Britain, Japan, Serbia, the USA, Italy - emerged victorious from the war. Russia, which had done so much for the victory of the allies, was not among the victorious countries because of the revolution and Lenin's decree to withdraw from the war, when the fate of Germany was already determined.
That's funny, did you forget about that little conflict called World War 1. Then the Germans almost defeated Russia again in WW2, which would have happened if it weren't for Lend-Lease from the West. Then there was the Cold War. As far as losing to non-Western countries- Poland, Finland, Afghanistan..... Do I need to keep going here?
@@JudgeVandelay Harry Truman made this statement a few days after Hitler's Germany attacked the Soviet Union, as published in The New York Times on June 24, 1941: "If we see that Germany is winning, we ought to help Russia, and if Russia is winning, we ought to help Germany, and thereby let them kill as many of each other as possible." You can also search for "Prescott Bush and Hitler" on Google. He is George Bush's grandfather. If American elites didn't nourish Nazi Germany like a mother breastfeeding, there wouldn't have been a World War II and tens of millions of corpses. There is a popular misconception in the US that America alone defeated Hitler. Well, to tell the truth, America did emerge with the greatest gain as a result of the destruction of Europe and the USSR.
Russia has guided munitions for their mlrs systems and for the 6inch and 8inch howitzers
The reason the TOS has such a short range is because it has far heavier warheads on a relatively small rocket, this allows big boom while being easily transportable and cheap.
The fact that the launcher is a tank allows it to get very close to the target with relatively low danger.
This is a very smart type of system and there are multiple advantages.
The system is also very simple to operate and can very easily be converter to a robot, you set it the target, it automatically uses GPS to drive to the fire position, it fires and then it returns.
These advantages mean other armies might want to invest in such a weapon system in the future. It can also work on a naval version, on a big drone boat designed to strike before a landing operation, limiting any risk to your own soldiers and at the same time delivering multiple times the payload of a long range system.
Wow, so many armchair engineers today.
@@occamraiser They've got ideas going for them at least, you only have complaints.
That's just what we need, drone tanks with thermobaric weapons.
@@ladeao1552 we aren’t too far away from coordinated drone armies and swarms. Its the new space race
It really doesn't matter that it is a tank because the ammunition is heavily exposed. There is no real advantage, which is why most armies don't do this. Long-range, light mlrs is the best way to invest
I love it that Cappy has to say 'non-firing' on the tiny GOAT guns to pass the TH-cam censors. Excellent coverage of an rarely discussed weapon system.
Always remember: "It's not a war crime the first time."
Actually it's only a war crime if you're the loser.
we also burned "witches" at the stake once upon a time.
So US dropped 2 nukes on Japan, one still counts as a war crime though 😅
@@paddington1670 That's why you never let an amateur operate the bbq grill. They probably used ketchup as well.
Ugh...
Tell it to the judge.
Like vietnam's napalm.
RUSSIA BAD AMERICA GOOD!!!
Doubt you were even around the last time the US used napalm. So why don't you just shut up junior.
Thermobarbaric.
The most horrific weapons ever invented.
You and your claims are so ridiculous that it defies any description❗
Former nato-soldier...
Every time this weapon system is mentioned, I always imagine the Russian commander saying something like: "Igor, get Buratino."
12:07 I didn't know Polish infantry served in Russian armed forces
Dear admin what been used by usa at Vietnam war agent orange. So pls don't talk louder.
Hey were you even alive during Vietnam? No? Then stfu and move on. What the US did in Vietnam over 50 years ago is not justification for what Russia does to Ukrainians today. What a completely stupid backward argument.
Get your ass to the recruiting center Tanky. Papa Putin needs you for his meat gridner.
3:27 the voiceover is correct, referencing the ww2 Sevastopol siege, but the wiki cutout is from the Crimean war, not the ww2 Sevastopol siege. Probably the editor blamoed it together real quick just looking up "Sevastopol siege" and called it a day. In fact i notice theres alot of mistakes better or worse in ur vids. I respect editors immensely and yours do a great job on the aesthetics, but the information on the screen is just off at times.
Napalm used in Vietnam was OK as it was Made in USA...
It was also last used in combat over 50 years ago, but sure let's go ahead ignore that because it makes you look smart. ...... Moron.
You put a wiki screenshot of the XIXth century Siege of Sebastopol, not the WWII battle one ;)
In the Gulf war the US used wepons enrisched with Uranium. A lot of areas in south of Iraq have high radioactivity near destroyed Iraqi tanks.
Should these wepons be allowed to be used i Ukrain?
Or does morality work for you differently depending on which country is doing the war crimes?
a moot point since russians have DU rounds for their tanks, they definitely will be issued to the crews if there is even a slight chance of clashes with leopards.
@@juslitor we have tank rounds capable of destroying Leopards and they're not DU. DU rounds are only for T-80BV tanks with new 2А46М-4 barrels. So far there is no evidence that we used them and most likely we won't since we need ukrainian agricultural fields.
Russia actually also has termobaric bombs. Russian name for them is "volumetric detonating aviation bombs", in russian "объёмно детонирующие авиационные бомбы" or "ОДАБ"
We have them too
@@kansasscout4322 why do you have them, they're not precise and they turn cities into rubble. It's for the "russian way of war", not for you lol
When a military attacks a city full of civilians, the civilians are not collateral damage. They are the target. That's just as true in Aleppo as in Hiroshima.
Can you imagine if Israel used these in Gaza? Where are the protests? The world is silent!
Hiroshima was packed full of military targets. If they hadn't built them in the city, it wouldn't have been targeted. Yeah, I know, learning history is just soooo hard.
@@nobodyspecial4702
Yup, when I read about that I was actually shocked about it!! At first I thought the US did it to flex their power, but after learning there was a high value target. Honestly if you built military object of any kind in coty...city.... expect your city being targeted for that reason.
@@nobodyspecial4702 Yup, a shame there were a lot more of civilian targets in the region, comes with the territory.
That is what every military does and why their opposition occupies those cities. They call it urban warfare.
Seen one get hit by a cluster bomb the other day on utube and it didn’t even leave a scratch on it as it went to continue firing
I was puzzled when I encountered the term "heavy flames thrower" systems in Russian reports of the conflict. I initially thought it was an error from the translater. But now I understand.
Someone explained in another comment that it is due to the difference between Russian and English. I dont speak Russian but this would be something that probably could only be proprely explaning by someone who do.
The subtle difference of "flame, thrower" and the tool known as a "flamethrower." lol.
It's a scary one, seems like the kind of weapon that no trench can protect you from.
denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance 😅🤣😂
In the experience of the entire history of humanity, only losers of wars commit war crimes.
Um… hate to break it to you, but that’s not even remotely true. Winners commit war crimes all the time.
I think he was implying that only losers of war get prosecuted, or even seriously accused in the media, of war crimes. Dresden, Tokyo and other fire bombings, Hiroshima/Nagasaki... any time prisoners were taken and the troops were given 5 minutes to take them back to base...
Like Ukraine doing war crimes?
@@executivelifehacks6747 Yep, there is always someone that misses the joke and gets all serious about it.
Amazing hypocrisy !! did you forget USA's use of napalm in Vietnam ??
Jesus again, the USA literally bombed Raqqa with artillery and air bombs while citizens were in it. It was a livig city. They surrounded it with the Kurds and just bombed it until it was gone. Why doesn't this guy mention that?
liar
I love how you have to specify GOAT guns are "NON-FIRING" every time you mentioned them by name. It reminds me of labels on appliances that are practically screaming to people "DON'T LET YOUR CHILDREN PLAY IN THIS". Some idiot really fucked up one time and did a lawsuit and now everyone gets to see a warning label as a monument to their stupidity.
It's because TH-cam demonitizes channels for showing guns. Which is retarded.
the contrast between the united states and russia is astounding. the united states focused on horrifying levels of precision while Russia went the "surely if i throw enough explosives at it, i'll hit it" approach
It's cheap to make dumb rockets and fill them with petroleum.
You could do a crude version with some fireworks and diesel.
Yeah love the Russian mindset and grindset
Have you ever read reports on the accuracy of American drone strikes?
It’s pitiful.
We Americans were so precise in Iraq we never killed any civilians lol. This mindset in our country of our moral warfare is a joke
@@deedeeramone34 have you ever heard of the satan stabber, its literally a giant shinzu knife, so idk what you mean by pitiful XD.
The cowardly Narrator must use over a half of the video admitting that the US uses similar weapons but absolves it of all responsibility stating how it uses it in more 'humanitarian' way. This cowardly double standards is what has made western hypocrites disgustedly repulsive. Why would the narrator bring up the Battle of Aleppo and leave out the battle of Mosul. Nothing was left out of Mosul but the narrator seams to assume its okay for the US to destroy cities and civilians. At least some sections of Aleppo were left
The title is inaccurate Russia needs to build and deploy these things MORE like a LOT more.
Precisely this is a security Russia defense priority
Yeah and of all its function ak defense arsenal they need to focus on extreme lethality of the defended if all kinds white possible ontrt widde the Us will tramike over with their massive Abrams tanks linke safari ants
Us is breaking kits if war crimes by deioloyinnlongrange
Kee it up livk the Us out if Russia n land alive ie dead
Why doesn't the author compare destruction of Aleppo, taken by Syrian forces with Russian AF support to Mosul taken by Iraq army with U.S. support.
Could be a good example of difference between how U.S. cares about civilians and collateral damage during a war VS how Russians don't.
Or... Maybe someone is just telling us BS and the U.S. is levelling cities to the ground with their guided ultra-smart weapons just as well?
To add on anti fort purpose, vacuum thermob rockets ignite in a chain reaction the available oxygen inside a structures everybody not killed or blown up violent heat and expanding gasses from ignition thats continuesly happening WILL suffocate during the aftermath
Current American FAE munitions include the following:
BLU-73 FAE I
BLU-95 500 lb (230 kg) (FAE-II)
BLU-96 2,000 lb (910 kg) (FAE-II)
CBU-72 FAE I
AGM-114 Hellfire missile
XM1060 grenade
SMAW-NE round for rocket launcher
Ruski bots hard at work tryna deflect to the US in a video having nothing to do with US lol.
I was born and raised on Southeast Ukraine and me and majority of the people living there call them Russian liberators not occupiers
Ukraine should surrender if they don’t like it . The Ukrainian offensive has made little to no gains and have took huge losses
Glad someone finally did a cursory on this system. It’s probably the most horrifying weapon in Ukraine right now
Every weapon is horrifying if you are at receiving end. For me it was very horrifying when US used cluster bombs against civilians, but I guess that is one of benefits when a country has democracy.
lmao, stop talk cringe
@@BojanPeric-kq9et Vietnam? US hasn't used cluster munitions (other than the AT "pucks") in a long, long time. We've gotten a lot of flak for the BLU-108's, unfairly, I think. They're precision anti-tank pucks.
All depends on how true the claims of chemical warfare are
@@chinadonttouchmyaccountmthf why dont you stop BEING cringe....
I loled so hard on a "west organizations concern about civilians" Part
Saying that the oxygen sucking effect adds to the destructive power is like saying that sound of the gunshot adds to the destruction of the bullet.
The only upside of using oxygen from the air is that the weapon does not need to carry its oxidizer, but that means the weapon has to make a close to stoichiometric mix with air for the explosion. This is not very ideal because only about 20% of the air is oxygen, so the rest of the air would consume energy to heat up. That means that these explosion are cooler, and less powerful compared to using high efficiency oxidizers. (this creates a non-trivial trade-off)
The vacuum is created by the explosion over-expanding (nothing to do with oxygen). Anything which can create lots of hot gas and cool it quickly can create a vacuum effect. The cooling is caused by the very fast expansion of the explosion. This weapon tend to heat up very large amount of air instead of just creating hot gas like more conventional explosives. This largely enhances the vacuum effect.
It's the vacuum it creates, and the ability to breathe. It is not remotely comparable to to a gunshot.
This kid comparing gunshots and vacuum bombs effect. 😱😂
You cant breath in the area of vaccum you dumbo.. there is no air(oxygen) to gasp because all of them has been exploded. Idk if it can explode your lungs also.
Thanks for the generous dose of engineering mythbusting. The amount of illiteracy amongst the media and various military tech pseudo-experts is absolutely cringe. Worst part being that they proliferate such nonsensical BS, which their audiences proceed to take as gospel.
you wrong in many points but i will say this . matter does not get destroyed for all we know oxygen will remain in air wheather you cool it or get it hot
@@macpj12j I literally cannot understand what you mean in your comment.
It would be a shame if a launch vehicle full of those were to get hit by a missile. 😏
Its work the other way around... 👀
TB warheads have to be triggered in a very specific way for the big boom. I doubt just hitting the launcher with a missile would cause the same effect as all of the warheads going off.
I never hear anyone complaining about the US occupying Syria.
and what about israel? He also war crime
Look up German weapon codenamed "Nebelwerfer" (smoke thrower). Giant revolver-type-rocket-launchers on artillery carriages were loaded with 8 short fat close range rockets.
I've heard the first eight shots were class propane tanks and the last was white phosphorous. I imagine it was a rush job and that getting that perfect detonation was iffy.
The notion that Prigozhin is trying to cover failure up yet walked the Ukrainians back from north and east of Soledar to behind bakhmut with a bunch of convicts isn't failure lol
Even if the civilian casualty figures are correct, it's still less than civilian casualties in a couple of Japanese cities. So it is not the US to blame someone for possible civilian losses.
Which is still less than the number of civs that would have died if a ground invasion of Japan was done
@@wesworld98 which is still less than the number of civs that would have died if the US stopped sticking their nose in other people's neighborhoods and sanctioning everyone in sight for not being gay enough
@@wesworld98 that is still not a good argument, like the afganistan war would be a whole lot quiker if the US bombed anything that moved but we at least try to avoid atrocities.
@@wesworld98 Lao, Vietnam, Cambodia, Korea, Germany, Italy, Syria, Iraq, Palastine?
@@wesworld98 Is it though? I know that's the conventional wisdom we all believe because that's what we're told every time the subject comes up, but indiscriminately wiping out two entire cities tells me otherwise. Would nuking Baghdad have fewer overall civilian casualties? What about nuking Kiev?
Ukraine is just jealous it doesn’t have it. If Ukraine had the capability to make them/buy them, they would.
I think Ukraine is most kicking themselves in the foot about giving up their nukes, big oof.
@@MasterBlasterSr Russia doesn't let you play both sides. Not if they believe they already own you.
@@caesarsalad1170 They get launched from moscow, if they were still in ukr putin could just detonate them.
@@holden5478 they pretty much did back before 2014 tho, when it became clear Ukraine wasn't going to stay neutral Russia got trigger happy.
There is no Confinements if you are at war. You use what you have to win except for nuclear weapons.
"Flame thrower?"
And I guess Willy Pete's are just "portable heaters"
Shake'n'bake, baby!
Works great, rockets are a serious problem. Currently per target limit is about 3-4 rockets. If its got ammo its definitely a number one target on the battlefield. Will collapse your lungs in the trench if you get caught no problem.
I've always thought TB weapons were very cool. Really kind of in a technical league of their own (not per say above other types of armament, but fairly unique all in all)
Also, remember when the Ukrainians used a thermobaric RPG-7 warhead to assassinate the Russian leader Givi after the Donetsk airport invasion by hitting the building he was in with it?
Btw Givi was born in Ilovaisk, Donbass
How could a local resident invade their own airport??
@@yastymanhe's just a victim of western prop
USMC uses thermobaric rockets in the SMAW
WE use thermobarics
When you fight in open terrain, a soldier digs a foxhole to hide from shrapnel that comes from artillery, rockets, mortars, etc... Thermobaric weapons are meant to kill everything within a certain radius that can actually breathe, it will burn oxygen along with your lungs within milliseconds.
Russian Tos launcher moves into positions, fires its entire salvo, and leaves in less than a min. It's hard to catch one and devastating to face it.
So in other words, it's very clever?
@@huntclanhunt9697 nooo it's Russian it can't be *checks notes* good!!! 😤
@@huntclanhunt9697 Weapons like that usually become controversial after intense use, that leads to bans. That's why we created rules of war, so men could actually return home
@@tomasgogashvily5350 no, they only become banned if they cause too much unnecessary suffering or if they contaminate the land. A thermobaric weapon kills much faster than traditional artillery rounds so they don't fall under that category.
Whats an issue here? Soldier blown up in pieces by 155mm landing next to him vs dying in foxhole by pressure.
Is one way less humane
What are depleted uranium shells classified as novelty weapons, seriously hypocritical
"My war, my rules...this is not complicated" ~ V. Putin
for today, these systems have been created: a Sun (on a tank course) and a Board (on a wheeled course) with a doubled firing range
That is "incorrect" if putting it mildly. Starting with the fact that Russia used "Solncepyok" practically from the start of the conflict. Saying it was engaged to specifically to capture Bahmut is pretty much a lie.
You are ridiculous, you are talking about weapons! And weapons kill because “war is kill people and destroy things” (F16 pilot cit.). What do you think you did around the world?
15:30 Aleppo - 30,000 deaths from destruction of 31,000 buildings? Was it evacuated already?
Thanks for this documentary. It just shows how appalling war is. If ordinary people had any control over this, they would be banned. And countries would have nothing to invade other countries with.
That never stopped people in the past.
@@asavelakuse6865 It has never been done in the past. The people have never been consulted or voted on it.
@@W_Bin I'm talking about invading countries.
@@mikes989 Like many people I didn't know about these places. Ukraine has made them more famous. But more importantly it has made ordinary people like me look at the horror of the people and the weapons used.
And at the lies like 30,000 buildings destroyed and less than 1 human per building killed.
That is why I asked, were the buildings empty?
@@W_Bin you do not know about those places because they were wiped out by those who told you that Russians killed 30 000 in Aleppo
Raqqa 80 % of city destroed by US bombs (wow such high accuracy) still mostly uninhabited.
Aleppo totally destroyed by evil russian now opened for tourists.
any day now russia will fall yep just around the corner lol
'Legal framework' is why nato keeps losing 20 year wars against goat herders.
Dumbass comment
Lost, you mean? US should have conducted a proxy war there. It was a mistake to send ground troops.
That and nato is g@y😅
Why people say Putin's army instead od russian army? It's so annoying. i didn't heard of Zelensky army so why Putin's?
The name of the latest variant of the TOS-1 "Solntsepiok" can be directly translated as Sun Burn, but the the more meaningful English translation should be something like Heat Waive.
Why don't we have such a rocket for our M270 MRLS system? Or do we? And I forgot.
we don't need to because ours are more deadlier
@@jeremywolfe6929 Specify please...'our what is deadly'?
We do, you forgot. We just classify them as incendiary, the thermobaric explosion is just an unintended side effect, so they aren't really war crime weapons. Fire has always been the best way to dig out entrenchments. It's not going to be banned ever.
@@charlesmartin1121 the ones the usa uses have a 180,000 tungsten balls in them and can airburst
@@kameronjones7139 Which unfortunately will not takeout a reinforced bunker.